obama speach
#143
1) The fact that one website does not have recorded data for the newest member of a national candidate does not reflect a shortcoming on the part of the candidate. Palin has been in the spotlight for some-odd 10 days. Her ideas, and ideals, will come out shortly.
Please note what I said about misinformation. It's easiest to attack someone when your target audience knows very little about them. Daily Kos couldn't get away with this bull____ with someone more "nationally established."
2) "Trooper-gate" is a crock. Well-documented evidence shows that the state trooper she wanted to fire tazed a 10-year old... and I'm willing to bet you'll never hear that side of the story.
3) "Can't run a family, how can she run a country?" - Please... this stab could be used against Hilary Clinton, who couldn't make her husband happy... so would she make the country happy? It's just loaded with illogical arguments, and should have no bearing in a fact-driven debate. Reality = her daughter got pregnant, and she's helping to manage it the best she can. This was her daughter's "mistake," not hers.
4) For CarbonXE ---
The difference between McCain and Obama lies in the fact that Obama has run on that single word "change" from day one. He claims to represent "a new type of politican," one who "is outside the norm," and who "will bring new, fresh ideas to government." Unfortunately, the proof is in the pudding, and Obama has offered nothing of the sort. In fact, his voting record indicates nothing but a hard-line leftist approach, and nothing more.
McCain on the other hand, has never postured himself to represent change. He runs on the notion that his policies are right... which, of course, is any basic political stance.
5) Palin has more experience than Obama. She had been in an elected position for 5 years prior to Obama's running for state senate, and in addition, she's actually served in the executive branches. People tend to overlook the fact that she was governor of a state only slightly smaller than Delaware, in terms of population. Though I'll concede the point she does not have the little bit of NATIONAL experience that Obama has, she has more experience directly relating to her future position. More "quality" experience, per se.
What Palin represents, though, is the "average working mom," which appeals to a conservative base that is largely comprised of "average working people." Like Obama tries to represent change, Palin directly appeals to those people working 9-5 in the heartland of America. People who go to church, own guns, and live paycheck-to-paycheck. I think she's going to solidify the Republican base. I'm happy to have her on the ticket... I think she adds youth and vigor to John McCain, in a similar fashion that Biden adds experience and temperance to a firey Obama.
------------- A few general points before my turn is up -------
I think there are a few misconceptions about the "average republican" that may need clearing up.
As we all know, the "image" of the Democratic party is tainted by radical leftists. These guys would rule you by force, not perhaps directly, but through taxation. Banning unhealthy behaviours (Smoking bans), banning unhealthy foods (ex. trans fats), inordinately tight environmental restrictions, limit your free speech (unless you agree), increasing governmental taxes to discourage use of products and behaviours, and outright legislation are some of the hallmarks and in-promptu examples.
Is every Democrat like that? Absolutley not.
The image of the Republican party on the other hand, is tainted by the bible beaters. Some of the extremists on this end would force religion on you, attempt to make ethical decisions for you, cut out nearly all social programs ("survival of the fittest only"), run wild with excessive corporate expansions, ban alcohol and drug use, and spread their own ideals on other nations by military force.
Is every Republican like that? In spite of what you're told, no.
----
The trick to figuring out your policiticans these days, is educating yourself about not only the information you obtain, but the source of that information. Two examples I'd like to bring in...
Fox News. Nothing brings out more spite from "liberals" than mentioning that network. This is partially due to it's wild success, but mainly due to the conservative viewpoint held by a majority of the commentators. Objectively, the reporting is "on par" with other news networks. In contrast, MSNBC has, in a similar fashion, tried desperately to align itself with an extreme anti-Bush, pro-Obama standpoint that is evident in every single article they publish. Using either one of these news sources as your only source will subject you to subtle bias, changing you over time.
Example two : Bloggers. Bloggers nowadays can get away with just about anything, including libel. The Daily Kos being a huge example. Every single day, there's a new user-submitted article that directly attacks conservatives with usually direct falsehoods and exaggerations, without even a hint of objectivism. The problem lies in that... one, in this type of environment, it doesn't matter what you say, just that you say it. I could state that "Obama has one ********," and the rumors might spread so quickly that it instantly becomes the thought majority, regardless of validity. There are plenty of extreme right-wing blogs, yet they're much more disseminated and don't carry the weight of the Daily Kos.
My point is... what you "hear" may not be the truth. When any source spreads a lie, rumor, conjecture, or fallacious argument as truth... the damage is already done.
Please note what I said about misinformation. It's easiest to attack someone when your target audience knows very little about them. Daily Kos couldn't get away with this bull____ with someone more "nationally established."
2) "Trooper-gate" is a crock. Well-documented evidence shows that the state trooper she wanted to fire tazed a 10-year old... and I'm willing to bet you'll never hear that side of the story.
3) "Can't run a family, how can she run a country?" - Please... this stab could be used against Hilary Clinton, who couldn't make her husband happy... so would she make the country happy? It's just loaded with illogical arguments, and should have no bearing in a fact-driven debate. Reality = her daughter got pregnant, and she's helping to manage it the best she can. This was her daughter's "mistake," not hers.
4) For CarbonXE ---
And McCain represents change how? Last time I checked, he plans on continuing Bush's plans and he agrees with 90% of Bush's policies.
McCain on the other hand, has never postured himself to represent change. He runs on the notion that his policies are right... which, of course, is any basic political stance.
5) Palin has more experience than Obama. She had been in an elected position for 5 years prior to Obama's running for state senate, and in addition, she's actually served in the executive branches. People tend to overlook the fact that she was governor of a state only slightly smaller than Delaware, in terms of population. Though I'll concede the point she does not have the little bit of NATIONAL experience that Obama has, she has more experience directly relating to her future position. More "quality" experience, per se.
What Palin represents, though, is the "average working mom," which appeals to a conservative base that is largely comprised of "average working people." Like Obama tries to represent change, Palin directly appeals to those people working 9-5 in the heartland of America. People who go to church, own guns, and live paycheck-to-paycheck. I think she's going to solidify the Republican base. I'm happy to have her on the ticket... I think she adds youth and vigor to John McCain, in a similar fashion that Biden adds experience and temperance to a firey Obama.
------------- A few general points before my turn is up -------
I think there are a few misconceptions about the "average republican" that may need clearing up.
As we all know, the "image" of the Democratic party is tainted by radical leftists. These guys would rule you by force, not perhaps directly, but through taxation. Banning unhealthy behaviours (Smoking bans), banning unhealthy foods (ex. trans fats), inordinately tight environmental restrictions, limit your free speech (unless you agree), increasing governmental taxes to discourage use of products and behaviours, and outright legislation are some of the hallmarks and in-promptu examples.
Is every Democrat like that? Absolutley not.
The image of the Republican party on the other hand, is tainted by the bible beaters. Some of the extremists on this end would force religion on you, attempt to make ethical decisions for you, cut out nearly all social programs ("survival of the fittest only"), run wild with excessive corporate expansions, ban alcohol and drug use, and spread their own ideals on other nations by military force.
Is every Republican like that? In spite of what you're told, no.
----
The trick to figuring out your policiticans these days, is educating yourself about not only the information you obtain, but the source of that information. Two examples I'd like to bring in...
Fox News. Nothing brings out more spite from "liberals" than mentioning that network. This is partially due to it's wild success, but mainly due to the conservative viewpoint held by a majority of the commentators. Objectively, the reporting is "on par" with other news networks. In contrast, MSNBC has, in a similar fashion, tried desperately to align itself with an extreme anti-Bush, pro-Obama standpoint that is evident in every single article they publish. Using either one of these news sources as your only source will subject you to subtle bias, changing you over time.
Example two : Bloggers. Bloggers nowadays can get away with just about anything, including libel. The Daily Kos being a huge example. Every single day, there's a new user-submitted article that directly attacks conservatives with usually direct falsehoods and exaggerations, without even a hint of objectivism. The problem lies in that... one, in this type of environment, it doesn't matter what you say, just that you say it. I could state that "Obama has one ********," and the rumors might spread so quickly that it instantly becomes the thought majority, regardless of validity. There are plenty of extreme right-wing blogs, yet they're much more disseminated and don't carry the weight of the Daily Kos.
My point is... what you "hear" may not be the truth. When any source spreads a lie, rumor, conjecture, or fallacious argument as truth... the damage is already done.
#144
Originally Posted by CarbonXe
Originally Posted by neodemon278
so just to recap this thead.......... we're screwed '08
#145
Senior Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Parsippany, NJ
Posts: 16,645
Originally Posted by senseiturtle
McCain on the other hand, has never postured himself to represent change. He runs on the notion that his policies are right... which, of course, is any basic political stance.
Is every Republican like that? In spite of what you're told, no.
#146
Originally Posted by senseiturtle
Palin has more experience than Obama. She had been in an elected position for 5 years prior to Obama's running for state senate, and in addition, she's actually served in the executive branches. People tend to overlook the fact that she was governor of a state only slightly smaller than Delaware, in terms of population. Though I'll concede the point she does not have the little bit of NATIONAL experience that Obama has, she has more experience directly relating to her future position. More "quality" experience, per se.
Originally Posted by senseiturtle
What Palin represents, though, is the "average working mom," which appeals to a conservative base that is largely comprised of "average working people." Like Obama tries to represent change, Palin directly appeals to those people working 9-5 in the heartland of America. People who go to church, own guns, and live paycheck-to-paycheck. I think she's going to solidify the Republican base. I'm happy to have her on the ticket... I think she adds youth and vigor to John McCain, in a similar fashion that Biden adds experience and temperance to a firey Obama.
Originally Posted by senseiturtle
As we all know, the "image" of the Democratic party is tainted by radical leftists. These guys would rule you by force, not perhaps directly, but through taxation. Banning unhealthy behaviours (Smoking bans), banning unhealthy foods (ex. trans fats), inordinately tight environmental restrictions, limit your free speech (unless you agree), increasing governmental taxes to discourage use of products and behaviours, and outright legislation are some of the hallmarks and in-promptu examples.
Is every Democrat like that? Absolutley not.
The image of the Republican party on the other hand, is tainted by the bible beaters. Some of the extremists on this end would force religion on you, attempt to make ethical decisions for you, cut out nearly all social programs ("survival of the fittest only"), run wild with excessive corporate expansions, ban alcohol and drug use, and spread their own ideals on other nations by military force.
Is every Republican like that? In spite of what you're told, no.
Is every Democrat like that? Absolutley not.
The image of the Republican party on the other hand, is tainted by the bible beaters. Some of the extremists on this end would force religion on you, attempt to make ethical decisions for you, cut out nearly all social programs ("survival of the fittest only"), run wild with excessive corporate expansions, ban alcohol and drug use, and spread their own ideals on other nations by military force.
Is every Republican like that? In spite of what you're told, no.
Fox News and Bloggers are probably the two worst sources of information... ever. Fox News has, repeatedly, been shown to have more bias than any other major news network, and they try to compensate for that with all their "fair and balanced" BS and trying to drill into our heads every five second that they're impartial. And it quite obviously shows, too. Fox and Friends, Bill O'Reilly, Hannity and Colmes... I mean, come on. On the other side of the spectrum, you have the Daily Kos, of course. There really aren't any good places to get information anymore. Lewis Black, when he's performing in Carnegie Hall, does a great spiel on this.
#147
Originally Posted by CarbonXe
Were you watching last night? Did you miss all the 'change' BS everyone was throwing around?
I don't intend to take the position of defending the McCain campaign... Like yourself, I would MUCH rather Ron Paul... or in fact... pretty much any other republican.
------------------------
I figure their intent on using that word is either :
1) Making indirect stabs at Obama, which conventions are usually all about.
or
2) Going on the notion that electing a woman from far outside the Beltway does represent "change" in one way or another, under the premise that she represents more change than Obama does.
-----------------------
McCain has never run on a change platform. He seems to just want to tweak the current system, which is a common platform for a same-party-as-outgoing-president scenario.
With that being said... isn't it easy to run on a Change platform? Pretty much anything other than the current administration would be "change," even if McCain took office. The reality is, he didn't always agree with Bush, particularly on many of the issues that "count."
On the statement that "90% agree with Bush" --- I'd like to propose that nearly every Republican running would fall into that category... with the addition of "most democrats would also likely agree with 60% of Bush's policies." Of course, such a statement would need proof which I cannot present at the moment, but the vast majority of run-of-the-mill politics and proposals are in small funding projects, non-binding resolutions, agreements to congratulate or censure, and other notoriously mundane crap. Such things are frequently cited as reference to back up broad statements, yet don't draw a distinction between the candidates.
For what it's worth... I personally agree with "McCain agrees 90% of Bush's policies." I don't think he was a particularly amazing president, but I think he did a better job than many other politicians could/would have done... and I think he's been a far better leader than Congress. Would I vote for him again? .... well... what other Republicans are running?
And not to "poison the well," but I'm fairly sure I'm about to hear lots of statements about a "poor economy" and "war failure" and several other talking points. I only ask that the future posters do a little research outside the mass media before rattling off talking points. Economies cycle, that's a fact. The war has been in some ways a failure, in some ways a success... (that's opinion). etc. etc.
#148
Originally Posted by CDogbert
But the problem is... is that McCain already had the demographic you're referencing locked up. He didn't need to go after the people who go to church, own guns, and live paycheck-to-paycheck; they already liked him.
On Palin's policies --- I can't make an objective judgment due to all the misinformation out there. I hope to learn more, sifting out the crap being dished out by attackers and overzealous supporters alike.
Notice how we aren't even talking about McCain anymore; we're just talking about Palin. The only thing worse than having everyone hating you is everyone not giving a crap about you.
If anything else, it'll make for an interesting few months. I've got to keep in mind though, no matter what happens... I'll be fine... I've got my guns and my bible
#149
Originally Posted by senseiturtle
If anything else, it'll make for an interesting few months. I've got to keep in mind though, no matter what happens... I'll be fine... I've got my guns and my bible
#150
Senior Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Parsippany, NJ
Posts: 16,645
Originally Posted by vettereddie
Originally Posted by senseiturtle
If anything else, it'll make for an interesting few months. I've got to keep in mind though, no matter what happens... I'll be fine... I've got my guns and my bible
#151
Originally Posted by senseiturtle
Absolutely correct, and if you'll notice, it's a tactic being used by the media. They've done everything possible to turn attention away from McCain at ALL times. During the primaries, you'd swear it was just Obama vs. Hillary. Now, it's all about attacking Palin, and hoping McCain falls into the bowels of irrelevancy.
Originally Posted by senseiturtle
On Palin's policies --- I can't make an objective judgment due to all the misinformation out there. I hope to learn more, sifting out the crap being dished out by attackers and overzealous supporters alike.
Originally Posted by senseiturtle
I don't think he really had the conservative base locked up. Thing is, he's historically leaned a little more to the left than the true hardcores would like... such has his immigration policy, for example. His associations with Liberman (as a democrat) were unnerving for people on the extreme right wing... who, of course, are a necessary part of a Republican winning an election.
I'm quite interested in the VP debate, and what that's going to do to the McCain/Palin base, too.
#152
Senior Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Parsippany, NJ
Posts: 16,645
Originally Posted by CDogbert
Originally Posted by senseiturtle
Absolutely correct, and if you'll notice, it's a tactic being used by the media. They've done everything possible to turn attention away from McCain at ALL times. During the primaries, you'd swear it was just Obama vs. Hillary. Now, it's all about attacking Palin, and hoping McCain falls into the bowels of irrelevancy.
#153
if mchusain is elected we are screwed end of story when they started chanting drill drill drill i was like fill big oils pocket fill big oils pocket throw out country down the drain get rid of the middle class more cheap labor more union breaking more debt more jobs lost more people joining the ranks of poverty more retarded red necks saying dont take my guns
#154
Originally Posted by CarbonXe
The best part about all this, is that she didn't even write her speech.
I'm looking at you, W.
#156
Boy, I sure am glad that the RNC told me that John McCain was a POW! I never knew that! I am so glad they shoved that down my throat for four consecutive nights! I've said it once and I'll say it again. McCain is not a hero. He was a POW and he is a survivor. Nothing more, nothing less. Before you Conservative Republican butt puppets go all internet tough guy on me, let me repeat myself. I admire and respect his service to this country. I cannot begin to imagine what he went through in Vietnam. I do not doubt his courage or his love for this country.
Take a look at his voting record on Veteran's Issues. He has not done a single thing for them since he returned to this country. Since I know most of you right wingers are not smart enough to know this I'll spell it out for you. There is a difference between a soldier and a veteran. Look it up in a dictionary and while you are there, look up hero too. That protester McCain said was "ground noise and the static". That ground noise and static was a Veteran of both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Do your homework, it is all true.
Now being an Obama supporter I will freely admit that McCain has more experience. The issue with Palin is not whether she has as much, less, better, or worse experience than Obama. The issue is can she step in to be President on January 21st if the 72 year old cancer survivor McCain dies after his inauguration. The clear answer is no way in H-E-Double Hockey Sticks. Insert Palin and/or Pit Bull joke here. Joe Biden is. Before you parrots say that she is a "quick study", realize that if you use that reasoning... Obama is just as qualified to be President.
Another talking point from the RNC is that Obama was never a Mayor, or a Governor. He never operated a business and he never led troops into battle. NEWS FLASH!! Neither has McCain! Never a Mayor. Never a Governor. Never a business owner. Never gave orders to troops, he took them.
If McCain is such a maverick he wouldn't have chosen Palin. He would have gone for Leiberman or Ridge. That would have taken big brass ones, but he did not. Instead he chose a candidate that would energize the Conservative base and possibly steal some Hillary voters that voted for her because she is a woman... not because of her position on the issues.
Republicans... running on fear and ignorance since 1996.
Take a look at his voting record on Veteran's Issues. He has not done a single thing for them since he returned to this country. Since I know most of you right wingers are not smart enough to know this I'll spell it out for you. There is a difference between a soldier and a veteran. Look it up in a dictionary and while you are there, look up hero too. That protester McCain said was "ground noise and the static". That ground noise and static was a Veteran of both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Do your homework, it is all true.
Now being an Obama supporter I will freely admit that McCain has more experience. The issue with Palin is not whether she has as much, less, better, or worse experience than Obama. The issue is can she step in to be President on January 21st if the 72 year old cancer survivor McCain dies after his inauguration. The clear answer is no way in H-E-Double Hockey Sticks. Insert Palin and/or Pit Bull joke here. Joe Biden is. Before you parrots say that she is a "quick study", realize that if you use that reasoning... Obama is just as qualified to be President.
Another talking point from the RNC is that Obama was never a Mayor, or a Governor. He never operated a business and he never led troops into battle. NEWS FLASH!! Neither has McCain! Never a Mayor. Never a Governor. Never a business owner. Never gave orders to troops, he took them.
If McCain is such a maverick he wouldn't have chosen Palin. He would have gone for Leiberman or Ridge. That would have taken big brass ones, but he did not. Instead he chose a candidate that would energize the Conservative base and possibly steal some Hillary voters that voted for her because she is a woman... not because of her position on the issues.
Republicans... running on fear and ignorance since 1996.
#157
Originally Posted by NorCal76
Take a look at his voting record on Veteran's Issues. He has not done a single thing for them since he returned to this country. Since I know most of you right wingers are not smart enough to know this I'll spell it out for you. There is a difference between a soldier and a veteran. Look it up in a dictionary and while you are there, look up hero too. That protester McCain said was "ground noise and the static". That ground noise and static was a Veteran of both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Do your homework, it is all true.
In addition, I'd like to point out that McCain did consistently vote for increasing benefits to current soldiers, including payraises and the like. Since this directly contradicts his straw-man'd position of "being anti-veteran," I would also like to infer that perhaps these bills on veteran's affairs were loaded-down with unnecessary crap... much like our current war spending bills. Democrats load it down with social projects they want passed, since they know that no Republican would vote against "funding the war."
Of course, I have no proof, and couldn't locate any in the spur of the moment. Then again, it's not my job to defend McCain, so take your issues up with them.
By the way, nice snide remark you've inserted there. That goes a long way towards having honest, open, even-tempered discussion of political issues and our varying opinions on them. Notice though we have disagreed, CarbonXE, CDogbert, and other contributors to our discussion have not resorted to baseless personal attacks. It'd be nice if you'd make an attempt at the same, for the sake of rational discussion.
Now being an Obama supporter I will freely admit that McCain has more experience. The issue with Palin is not whether she has as much, less, better, or worse experience than Obama. The issue is can she step in to be President on January 21st if the 72 year old cancer survivor McCain dies after his inauguration. The clear answer is no way in H-E-Double Hockey Sticks. Insert Palin and/or Pit Bull joke here. Joe Biden is. Before you parrots say that she is a "quick study", realize that if you use that reasoning... Obama is just as qualified to be President.
1) McCain is not guaranteed to die in office. Therefore, Palin is not guaranteed to become President.
2) Obama, if he wins, WILL become president. We WILL have an inexperienced leader.
Therefore, while attacking Palin's experience in the general sense may be valid, consider 2 things.
A- Pot calling Kettle black... or if you prefer... Pot calling Kettle "inexperienced."
and
B- It's an exercise in assumptions that she would become president.
Another talking point from the RNC is that Obama was never a Mayor, or a Governor. He never operated a business and he never led troops into battle. NEWS FLASH!! Neither has McCain! Never a Mayor. Never a Governor. Never a business owner. Never gave orders to troops, he took them.
If McCain is such a maverick he wouldn't have chosen Palin. He would have gone for Leiberman or Ridge. That would have taken big brass ones, but he did not. Instead he chose a candidate that would energize the Conservative base and possibly steal some Hillary voters that voted for her because she is a woman... not because of her position on the issues.
For that matter... if Liberman, Ridge, or whoever else would be the best vice president... why'd Obama go with Biden?
Republicans... running on fear and ignorance since 1996.
#158
Senior Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Parsippany, NJ
Posts: 16,645
Originally Posted by NorCal76
Boy, I sure am glad that the RNC told me that John McCain was a POW! I never knew that! I am so glad they shoved that down my throat for four consecutive nights! I've said it once and I'll say it again. McCain is not a hero. He was a POW and he is a survivor. Nothing more, nothing less. Before you Conservative Republican butt puppets go all internet tough guy on me, let me repeat myself. I admire and respect his service to this country. I cannot begin to imagine what he went through in Vietnam. I do not doubt his courage or his love for this country.
#159
Originally Posted by NorCal76
Boy, I sure am glad that the RNC told me that John McCain was a POW! I never knew that! I am so glad they shoved that down my throat for four consecutive nights! I've said it once and I'll say it again. McCain is not a hero. He was a POW and he is a survivor. Nothing more, nothing less. Before you Conservative Republican butt puppets go all internet tough guy on me, let me repeat myself. I admire and respect his service to this country. I cannot begin to imagine what he went through in Vietnam. I do not doubt his courage or his love for this country.
#160
Originally Posted by senseiturtle
Notice though we have disagreed, CarbonXE, CDogbert, and other contributors to our discussion have not resorted to baseless personal attacks.
Originally Posted by 2006bluetc
I just don't understand how you can't see him as a hero
I've been thinking; why aren't we comparing Biden v. Palin and McCain v. Obama? Why do we keep doing this asinine Palin v. Obama dance?